Survey of San Francisco Waldorf School Parents

REPORT

Dan Dugan

July 31, 1997

ABSTRACT

Parents at a private school organized by followers
of Rudolf Steiner were sent a questionnaire about their religious and
philosophical beliefs. The responses indicate that the majority of
parents may be sympathetic to popular "new age" beliefs which Steiner
followers also hold, but that they have little knowledge of the
specific cult belief system. The respondents express overwhelming
opposition to some pseudo-scientific doctrines which are taught in
the school. The ethical consequences of the situation are
considered.

INTRODUCTION

I fell in love with the San Francisco Waldorf
school while my son was in sixth and seventh grades there. I became
gradually more disillusioned as I learned more about the theory
behind it. I was very impressed by the dedication of the teachers and
the integration of art into all subjects. Their unconventional
techniques such as teaching subjects in blocks of two or three weeks
at a time appeared innovative and exciting. Some glimpses of
Steiner's writings in books sold at the school raised difficult
questions, but enamored as I was, I put my misgivings aside for a
while. I accepted the teachers' assurances that the school used
Steiner's method of education, but didn't teach the content of
"anthroposophy," Steiner's name for his occultist group which split
off from Theosophy.

I felt obliged to react when my son brought home
strange reports from science classes. For example, a specialist who
came in to teach a sixth-grade chemistry unit declared "the elements
are earth, air, fire and water." I took a closer look at the science
curriculum and found bad news. The class work included a significant
amount of pseudoscientific material drawn from the teachings of
Steiner and his followers. Students were being taught lunatic fringe
beliefs that are completely unacceptable as science outside a cult of
believers. For example, the assertion that white light can not be
divided into the colors of the spectrum, and statements about
"planetary influences" on the growth of plants. But there was worse
to come. The whole science curriculum was dumbed-down to avoid
conflict with anthroposophical doctrine. This meant teaching mainly
observation of nature, without the essential theories that tie it all
together and lead to useful application of the knowledge.

As a committed and active parent, I expressed my
objections, and proposed a committee of parents and teachers to
improve the science curriculum. The teachers responded by saying that
parents choose the school because of its spiritual approach, and if
we didn't like it we should leave. This struck me as a bit odd, since
the school's recruitment process didn't give a hint of there being an
agreement on religious matters between the parents and the school.
The parents I was acquainted with knew little about anthroposophy.
When I persisted in my challenge, the governing committee of teachers
expelled our family and hushed up the affair.

I decided that the best antidote for this
apparently habitual hypocrisy would be to expose the facts. As a
first step, I wanted to test the teachers' claim that the parents
shared the school's philosophy. Maybe it was only me who was in the
wrong place. Every group has a right to teach its beliefs. If the
parents were all anthroposophists, then in their private religious
school they could have as much anthroposophy as they liked.

I made up a survey which combined questions about
belief systems in general with specific questions on characteristic
tenets of Steiner doctrine. I sent the survey to 270 parents in 183
families. Two-parent families got one for each parent. I promised
anonymity and included a stamped return envelopes. There was no
follow-up, to minimize disturbance to the community.

Thirty-two surveys were returned, representing
about twelve percent of the parent body. The quality of the responses
was heartening. Answers to the "essay questions" were thoughtfully
drawn, and many wrote unsolicited comments in the margins. These were
so interesting that I reproduce them below, and regret not having
encouraged parents to comment as they went along.

I received one phone call from a parent who viewed
the survey as an attack on the school and refused to participate,
saying that I could distort the results to prove anything that I
wanted. Another wrote me to discuss her discomfort with the school's
philosophy.

RELIGIOUS BACKGROUNDS

The first section of the survey asked about the
parent's religious upbringing and their present beliefs.

31% were brought up as Catholics. The proportion
of all types of Christian upbringings is 56%. Only 12% now affiliate
with traditional denominations. I interpret twelve (37%) of the
responses as Eastern or new-age positions, including seven (22%) who
mention Buddhism. No one said they were affiliated with the
Anthroposophical Society or the Christian Community, a church
following Steiner.

PHILOSOPHICAL OR RELIGIOUS WORLD-VIEWS

"If the above isn't sufficient, can you
describe your world-view in a few words?"

We believe spirit
created God. God created three realms. Causal, realm of thought, and
created beings with causal bodies. God's creation then manifest as
the astral realm, the world of light. The causal beings were encased
in astral bodies. Then, later, the physical realm, and we are encased
in physical bodies every 300-500 years, *There is one purpose to
life, i.e. life here on earth, to become one with god
again.*

"Secular Humanist" comes
closest.

I take one day at a time, but look forward
to a technologically bright future. I enjoy and use the present
technological advances of today. I look forward to virtual reality
and know that it is not too far away. I am a scientific
person!

My true beliefs are that we reap what we
plant.

My view of the world at present is that it
is headed for a major shift in the coming decade. We are literally
moving from one dimension (or state of consciousness) into
another, from 3rd to 4th, which will be represented by a total
shift in human beings. We are in a state of much darkness (as we
have been for eons) and the time is 'now' to shift this into the
light. People must now make a conscious choice towards the light -
else we are headed for MUCH upheaval! No thing is more important
at this time (aside from letting go of all denials, which is
another topic all together!).

I have the simple belief in what goes
around comes around. Hence, belief in the Golden Rule.

Humanistic/Existential. Please note that
the word God is left to my own definition, which may/may not be
yours.

Believe in a spiritual reality: unity of
man, natural and spiritual world.

Live and let live, do listen to the law of
nature and its forces.

I believe in an unknowable God - and the
possibility of human spiritual evolution. I have had personal
experiences of telepathy, past-life recall, and Awe, which lead me
to believe there's more out there than is quantifiable
scientifically. My experiences of wonder and reverence are, in
general, what make my life worth living.

No, not to you here. Many of the questions
below indicate your expectation to be "either-or" oriented. This
does indicate your own personal lack of seeing the
interrelatedness of all things, and energy, and your approach will
prove unsatisfactory therefore.

I just try to live a decent life, without
harming anyone. Kind of a loner. I followed Eastern beliefs put
forth by the TM movement at one time, but have snapped out of it.
Independent thinking and individual freedom is important to me.
People often "follow" because they are afraid to go it
alone.

I very much believe in the spirituality of
the Body.

Universal spiritual connectedness without
affiliation to a one sighted dogma as with
fundamentalism.

God is Love and Love must Love.

We are all "it" ... God, if you will. Yet
memory doesn't serve many of us. Waking up to this realization is
the ultimate.

Although I am connected with the NSA
organization, I am not a fanatic.

Several of these world-view statements indicate
some kinship to the anthroposophical philosophy, but none of them use
Steiner's characteristic terminology.

STATEMENTS OF BELIEF

In the next section, parents were asked to rate
their support for a variety of philosophical assertions. No comments
were solicited but those that were made are reported.

"For each statement, please circle the
expression which is closest to your own belief."

1. "God created the earth in six 24-hour days
about six thousand years ago."

Respondents' Comments

Meaningless numbers.

Author's Comments

Belief statement 1 expresses biblical literalism
as held by evangelical Christians. Biblical literalists have their
own school system, and evidently are not represented in this group.
Question 2
(below) shows that a majority could be considered religious in the
traditional sense.

2. "Even today, miracles are performed by the
power of God."

Of course!

Define God. I say he/she is within us
all.

(one changed it to "by unseen power."
)

3. "After death, human souls can return to live
another life."

Of course!

Yes, but I don't believe in chronological
time. All lives are lived at once.

4. "The spirits of the dead can speak through
channelers."

A dangerous and absurd practice!

What is dead?

5. "An astrological birth chart is useful
because it contains information about a person's
character."

It's a very limited tool.

Poor wording: "character."

6. "Wearing a crystal can be beneficial to
health."

Mildly, but definitely. Meditation is 100's
of times more effective.

I suppose whatever one wants to
believe.

Reincarnation (3) is a central doctrine of
anthroposophy. The support for the statement on crystal power
(6) is
remarkable. It elicited a curiously small proportion of
undecided.

7. Medicine has improved in the 20th century
because theories and treatments are now subjected to scientific
testing.

8. Anthroposophical medicine is superior to
conventional medicine.

Wot th' heck IS it?

Don't know a thing about
anthroposophy.

Depends on circumstance.

Anthroposophical medicine IS conventional
(age-old) medicine and it is equal in quality to modern scientific
medicine, meaning they complement each other.

Anthroposophical medicine is a major activity of
Steiner followers. It explicitly opposes conventional scientific
medicine. In 7
twenty parents supported scientific medicine and seven opposed it. In
8, half hadn't
heard of anthroposophical medicine. Of the half who had an opinion, a
majority of ten to six didn't think it was superior to conventional
medicine.

9. "The heart is not a pump."

One of its functions is this. What do you
mean pump?

Again, no clear definition.

I don't understand this sentence. I think
the heart is both a pump (muscle) and an etheric center chest
chakra - energizes and balances all other chakras.

I don't know in what way you mean
this.

(put quotes on "pump") What are your
concerns REALLY?

10. "Newton's theory that white light can be
divided into the colors of the rainbow is wrong. Color is the deeds
and sufferings of light. It results from the conflict of light and
darkness."

("wrong" underlined) Who can say one
metaphor is right and another wrong?

Beliefs 9 and 10 are expressions of
anthroposophical pseudoscience. The slogan "The heart is not a pump"
is repeated often. The parents rejected this confidently,
twenty-three to four. Newton's error is a fundamental tenet of
"Goethean Science" taught in Waldorf schools. Fewer parents were sure
about this, but the rejection is seventeen to two.

Can't answer - what are "occult powers?"
Don't have any information anyway.

Don't know a thing about him.

Occult = hidden, no more, no
less.

You might as well ask: did
Jesus?

Rudolph Steiner claimed many times to have occult
powers, clairvoyance and "supersensible perception," the ability to
perceive a spirit world hidden behind ordinary perception. He rested
the credibility of all his teachings on this foundation.

12. "No person has ever been able to
demonstrate any supernatural power in a situation where the
possibility of delusion or deception has been excluded."

Belief 12 is a fundamental tenet of
skepticism and secular humanism.

13. "The physical body of a human is organized
into three systems, the nerve-sense system, the metabolic-muscular
system, and the rhythmic system, which mediates between the other
two."

("rhythmic system") I don't know the
meaning of this term, but it sounds ridiculous.

There are many lenses with which to view.
This is not necessarily true or false.

Why is this model considered either true or
false?

14. "Impulses from the central nervous system
are carried to the muscles and organs by the motor nerve
cells."

The three systems of the body in 13 describe the basic
organization of physiology as taught by Steiner. The overwhelming
"don't know" response shows that these parents are not familiar with
his teachings. Statement 14 is an expression of scientific physiology found in a
typical sixth-grade science book. Steiner followers oppose this
specific point, saying instead that the motion of the limbs is caused
by the direct action of "the will" in the muscles. The parents
supported science over Steiner twenty-three to three.

15. "The members of the whole man include the
etheric body and the astral body."

True but I would call your "etheric" a
"causal" body - but close enough for a survey!

Among others.

(underlined "man") Please don't use this
word if you mean human.

From Steiner.

ANALYSIS

I thought it would be interesting to know what the
relationship might be between new-age beliefs in general and belief
in anthroposophical teachings. I added up a "new-age belief score"
for each individual survey by combining the responses to questions
3,
4,
5 and
6. I counted
"False!" as zero and "True!" as four points. Similarly I made an
"anthroposophical belief score" for each person by adding up the
responses to 9,
10,
11 and
15. The pairs of
scores from each person's survey are shown as a two dimensional
relationship:

Chart 1: Anthroposophical and new-age
beliefs tend to go together.

The thirty-two parents' scores cluster loosely
around a suggested diagonal line. This indicates that approval of
new-age beliefs and approval of anthroposophical ideas are related in
this group, that is, parents more commonly accept both than one or
the other exclusively. The angle of the cluster more toward the
new-age axis shows a stronger acceptance in that direction.

Another question I have relates to the efficiency
of the school in converting families to the anthroposophical
world-view. How do the anthroposophy scores compare to the years in
the school?

Chart 2: Is belief in anthroposophy
stronger in parents who have been at the school longer?

A trend is noticeable here too. Keep in mind that
the present population of the school is greater in the lower grades,
and that the drop-out rate is unknown. Perhaps those who stay believe
in anthroposophical ideas more strongly as years go by, or those who
don't believe withdraw.

CONCLUSIONS

The school's claim that the parents choose the
Waldorf school because they agree with its philosophy is false. The
evidence supports my contention that most parents know very little
about anthroposophy. Furthermore, the responding parents directly
opposed some tenets of anthroposophy, especially in the sciences.
Most parents are not aware of the poverty of the science curriculum
or of its pseudoscientific content.

Since the Waldorf School curriculum includes a
significant amount of anthroposophical doctrine, this evidence raises
ethical questions. What is the morality of missionary activities
which are carried out through a hidden agenda? Is it honorable to
teach religious beliefs to children which are not shared by their
parents?